Hi! El mar., 20 ago. 2019 05:35, Jérôme Lebleu <jer...@maroufle.fr> escribió:
> Hi Lisandro, > > I am happy to read from you! > > Le 19/08/2019 à 21:42, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer a écrit : > > I'm afraid it's failing to build from source: > > > > x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5 -isystem > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/QtMultimedia -isystem > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/QtGui -isystem > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/QtNetwork -isystem > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/QtScript -isystem > /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/QtCore -I. -isystem /usr/include/libdrm > -I/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/mkspecs/linux-g++ -o qlcfixturedefcache.o > qlcfixturedefcache.cpp > > qlcfixturedef.cpp: In member function ‘QLCPhysical > QLCFixtureDef::physical() const’: > > qlcfixturedef.cpp:342:12: error: implicitly-declared > ‘QLCPhysical::QLCPhysical(const QLCPhysical&)’ is deprecated > [-Werror=deprecated-copy] > > > 342 | return m_physical; > > | ^~~~~~~~~~ > > In file included from qlcfixturedef.h:28, > > from qlcfixturemode.h:29, > > from qlcfixturedef.cpp:28: > > qlcphysical.h:78:18: note: because ‘QLCPhysical’ has user-provided > ‘QLCPhysical& QLCPhysical::operator=(const QLCPhysical&)’ > > > 78 | QLCPhysical& operator=(const QLCPhysical& physical); > > | ^~~~~~~~ > > cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors > > make[3]: *** [Makefile:1206: qlcfixturedef.o] Error 1 > > make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > make[3]: Leaving directory '/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/engine/src' > > make[2]: *** [Makefile:90: sub-src-make_first-ordered] Error 2 > > make[2]: Leaving directory '/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/engine' > > make[1]: *** [Makefile:96: sub-engine-make_first-ordered] Error 2 > > make[1]: Leaving directory '/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>' > > dh_auto_build: make -j2 returned exit code 2 > > make: *** [debian/rules:14: build] Error 255 > > dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build subprocess returned exit > status 2 > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Build finished at 2019-08-19T19:38:24Z > > > > > > Could it be the switch to gcc-9? > > Thanks for your report, I have just discovered that yesterday too. Yes > it should be the switch to gcc-9 as there were no errors before... I > have added -Wno-error=deprecated-copy for the moment to makes this > warnings not be errors. I will take the time as soon as possible to > report it upstream, if it is not meanwhile fixed. Is it also okay for a > first upload too? > I think it is. >
